Thursday, 30 October 2008

Andrew Gilligan caught 'sockpuppeting' his critics

"There's a certain mad nobility in the way Boris's opponents seem determined to strap themselves to the most unpopular causes going. You wonder what's next a support group for double-glazing salesmen? A bid to rehabilitate that misunderstood feminist icon, demonised by the Right-wing media, Rose West?"

Now where have I heard that one before? Could it be from an 'anonymous' commenter a few weeks back:

"There's a certain mad nobility in this blog's obsessive support for the most unpopular vehicles in London. What's next - a campaign to rehabilitate Rose West?"

"The point the Gilligan piece was making is that the world has changed. It's not Boris or "Tory ultras" that will "abandon" the 50,000 new affordable homes target - it's the economy, and it's going to happen whether Dave Hill likes it or not"

"Nobody outside the ranks of Ken Livingstone supporters would accept your principal commentator, Dave Hill, as "independent". He has repeatedly attacked Johnson, found endless inventive ways to repeat the "racist" slur about him, done his very best to downplay the importance of the LDA grants scandal and made clear his delight at polls showing Ken closing the gap."

"Dave Hill's famously unbiased reporting has unfortunately omitted to mention the several callers who suggested that Ken was "bitter," that he should stop "slagging off Boris Johnson" and that his mayoralty had "lost its way." As for Ken's claim that Gilligan is obsessed with him, I counted about fifteen mentions of Gilligan. Who, exactly, is the obsessive one here?"

"Nor will it do to write off everyone who opposes Ken or New Labour as, by definition, a Daily Mail reactionary. If Polly had ever read any of Gilligan's columns, she would see someone writing from a broadly left-wing, if anti-New Labour, perspective"

Or a pro-New Conservative perspective? Or an anti-anti Boris Johnson one? Or a pro-sockpuppeting your critics vibe? Or an anti-responding under your own name slant? Which is it Andrew? Your public deserves to know!

25 comments:

Maybe he should begin an investigation into himself. He could start by exposing his links to a sad old man obsessively and secretly searching his own name on the internet while publicly harping back to the glorious days when he was once a respected journalist. All he needs is an anonymous source...

I presume Gilligan means bendy buses when he refers to "the most unpopular vehicles in London". But is there any evidence that they are wildly unpopular? I find it fascinating that Gilligan (and his supporters) continue to repeat this without any evidence and then try to suggest that people who ask for the evidence are obsessives!

None that I've seen. Public transport vehicles tend not to be popular with users (you can always find something to dislike in something you use every day, while the rosy glow of nostalgia hides the defects of the old RM). However, the London Travelwatch report stated they had no casework from people complaining about them and Livingstone has claimed TfL's research shows them as the most popular bus to travel on, which could be worth a Mayoral question or FoI request.

I was a Cambridge contemporary of Andrew Gilligan, where I knew him through Cambridge Labour Students. In February 1995 Andrew Gilligan impersonated another Labour student in order to post to usenet having a go at me and at another member of the group.

No, he's saying that they're untrustworthy Labour stooges because the widow of Bernie Grant MP became chairman shortly after the report was written. And it's all a beastly feminine plot by all these Labour wimmin to take away our manly Routemasters.

The LTW document is written in response to TfL plans developed under, er, Boris Johnson, and makes well-founded critiques of them.

Of course, what he actually means is that bendy buses are among "some of the most disliked things in London" with his kind of people. You know, the ones who get around London by being picked up by a car paid for by their employer.

Why not run a popularity contest:Bendy bus v Andrew Gilligan?The criteria could be appearance ( tough choice there), credibility (I'd put my money on the transport), ability to cause controversy (money on Gilligan if the contest isn't run by the Standard), reliability (money on Gilligan if the contest is run by the Standard).

More people can ride on a bendy bus at once, though, so we'd also be looking at the extra costs of running a fleet of thousands of Gilligans, plus the environmental effects of the constant whining noises they'll produce. The cost in earplugs alone for those unfortunate enough to live on Gillified routes would run into millions.

Not to mention the as yet unquantified effects on the young of breathing in the clouds of industrial-strength innumeracy they'd produce.

"Why not run a popularity contest:Bendy bus v Andrew Gilligan?The criteria could be appearance ( tough choice there), credibility (I'd put my money on the transport), ability to cause controversy (money on Gilligan if the contest isn't run by the Standard), reliability (money on Gilligan if the contest is run by the Standard)."

How about turning circle - how long it takes to turn from the left to the right?